BiscottiGelato

Totally agree. Since last week I was already disgusted with what was going on.

Heck I totally agree with how Conservative was trying to squeeze on government spending in a variety of areas and go without a short sighted stimulus plan. Moreover, I wonder where our law is when it can be re-written somehow and changed over night (on the coalition government which sounds that it's possible without a re-election?)

If anything, and if there's a relection, it'll only go in Conservative's favor for a majority government for the Conservative.....

Anyways, hail to reduction in government spending, down Federal Liberal and Federal NDP.!!

BiscottiGelato

原帖由 soli 於 2008-12-1 21:55 發表
這次金融海嘯﹐讓自由市場主義再次破產。為挽救經濟﹐各國政府經濟政策也向左傾斜﹐連號稱最自由經濟體﹐失業率還在4%以下的香港﹐也保證不削減政府開支﹐避免增加任何對經濟不利的因素。

偏偏有我們的保守黨﹐基於意識形態的限制 ...

who says that increasing government spending will get us out of this mess the quickest? You are purely carrying Keynesian view of economics. There are other views that calls for minimizing government intervention, which will yes, make the immediate future hard, but on the long term allow for quicker recovery. Knee jerk reaction and showing off what the government can do something by handing out candies is not what I want, I want long term outlook and resolution. I can't say whehter capital injection or reduce government's burden on the market is the correct way to get us out of this recession the quickest. In fact, nobody out there know for SURE what is the correct action and the correcdt magnitude of action to carry out. But if anything, Liberal and NDP is mainly just pissed off on the lack of public funding they get more than any of the issue with economic stimulation. I don't see how Liberal and NDP are the less of the evils when compared to the Conservatives. If anything I like how the Conservative tries to reduce political spending from public fundings. I'm sure effort in preventing a fiscal deficit will definately be better for Canada in the long term.

BiscottiGelato

soli, maybe you should see what this guy has to say (Peter Schiff) on what the 'other side' will want to say as opposed to just pumping money thru 'government stimulations'

His track record:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Problem with bigger government, bigger economic stimulus. Specifically around the 8 minute mark on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB9fuIvksLw

I like what the Conservative is trying to do in terms of reducing government spending, at least on this round. We don't have to follow the rest of the world in pumping money, especially when we are not China which have a huge cash pile in the bank account. If anything we are more like the US, with debt in the back. If anything we should save, we should continute with fiscal surpluses.

Liberal and NDP is just crooks on this round. I'm not saying Conservative is the saviour, but definately is the lesser of the evil on this case.

[ 本帖最後由 BiscottiGelato 於 2008-12-1 23:06 編輯 ]

BiscottiGelato

原帖由 soli 於 2008-12-1 23:09 發表
那 BiscottiGelato 即認為現在政府應該甚麼也不用做。大企業銀行要倒就讓他們倒﹐失業率上升就讓他升﹐政府收入少了﹐就削減開支﹐帶頭裁減公務員﹐加稅。等到大家跳樓的跳樓﹐燒炭的燒炭。重複看兒子欠債砍母親﹐失業父親殺全家後 ...

Stuffing words in my mouth doesn't gain you any credibility. I am merely saying there are two sides to the argument. Economic stimulation is not the only way that might solve the problem. It might make it worse. Did I ever say the government should do nothing? I just said that they shouldn't try to solve the problem by using lowly economic stimulation strategy like the US has.

People are hungry now doesn't mean you should just buy food for them. You can reduce government spending, thus reducing tax on both corporate and the people, allowing higher productive to increase things like exports, which actually increase the value of both the dollar, foreign reserve, foreign investment and thus ultimately lead to domestic wealth and job creation. This comparitively is a slower method, but it's the sustainable method. How much unnecassary jobs can the government afford to pay out of it's own account? I am just saying the government should do whatever it always have been doing, but also tighten up their spending to reduce taxes on categories that allow for more competitive climate for business and hirings. I am encouraging the government to employ long term sustainable approaches as opposed to stupid method that only focuses on instant gratification.

Even tho yes, I agree that most people just look at the jobless rate for the next month and the GDP for the next year. But a responsible government should have a longer outlook than that. Contracting government spending is definately a great start so the government have more bullets to place money at the right places and if anything, to at least not go back into a red bottomline.